The recent revolution in technologies for dynamically sharing virtualizations of hardware resources, software, and information storage across networks has increased the reliability, scalability, and cost efficiency of computing. More specifically, the ability to provide on demand virtual computing resources and storage through the advent of virtualization has enabled consumers of processing resources and storage to flexibly structure their computing and storage costs in response to immediately perceived computing and storage needs. Virtualization allows customers to purchase processor cycles and storage at the time of demand, rather than buying or leasing fixed hardware in provisioning cycles that are dictated by the delays and costs of manufacture and deployment of hardware. Rather than depending on the accuracy of predictions of future demand to determine the availability of computing and storage, users are able to purchase the use of computing and storage resources on a relatively instantaneous as-needed basis.
Virtualized computing environments may provide various guarantees as to the availability and durability of computing resources. Distributing computing resources amongst multiple resource hosts may provide different availability and durability characteristics. For example, virtual computing resources may provide block-based storage. Such block-based storage provides a storage system that is able to interact with various computing virtualizations through a series of standardized storage calls that render the block-based storage functionally agnostic to the structural and functional details of the volumes that it supports and the operating systems executing on the virtualizations to which it provides storage availability. The placement of block-based storage relative to the computing virtualizations that utilize the storage may impact the performance of the storage and virtualizations with respect to access operations and failure scenarios. In these scenarios where the placement of different resources effects performance, such as the block-based storage, and computing virtualizations example given above, decisions to place resources may be independently performed (e.g., by different systems or services for each resource), allowing for sub-optimal placement of resources due to placement decisions that are unaware of the placement of other resources that effect performance.
While embodiments are described herein by way of example for several embodiments and illustrative drawings, those skilled in the art will recognize that the embodiments are not limited to the embodiments or drawings described. It should be understood, that the drawings and detailed description thereto are not intended to limit embodiments to the particular form disclosed, but on the contrary, the intention is to cover all modifications, equivalents and alternatives falling within the spirit and scope as defined by the appended claims. The headings used herein are for organizational purposes only and are not meant to be used to limit the scope of the description or the claims. As used throughout this application, the word “may” is used in a permissive sense (i.e., meaning having the potential to), rather than the mandatory sense (i.e., meaning must). Similarly, the words “include”, “including”, and “includes” mean including, but not limited to.